Knowledge Gap

by

Introduction

The essential notion of the knowledge gap is the proposition that a discrepancy exists in the knowledge that people of varying
socioeconomic levels attain when engaging mass media content. In other words, the information-rich get richer when reading
newspapers or watching television news reports, whereas those with relatively less background knowledge typically gain information
at a comparatively lesser rate. The knowledge-gap hypothesis, explicitly formulated by Tichenor, Donohue, and Olien in 1970,
goes beyond suggesting a simple knowledge difference between those with more and less formal education. What the hypothesis
suggests is not just that there is a gap in knowledge between groups but also that this gap in knowledge widens as more information
enters a society. The knowledge gap hypothesis has stimulated communication research in the United States and elsewhere since
1970. So far, researchers have published more than one hundred studies directly considering the knowledge-gap notion, and
scholars have widely cited knowledge gap research in many different disciplines.

Background and Introductory Works

The knowledge gap hypothesis first appears formally in Tichenor, et al. 1970. Studying the effects of newspaper readership in Minnesota communities in the 1960s (see Tichenor, et al. 1980 for detail), Phillip J. Tichenor, George A. Donohue, and Clarice N. Olien—an interdisciplinary research team at the University
of Minnesota—found that the slope of information uptake was significantly steeper for those with relatively higher educational
attainment, such that the gap between individuals with higher and lower education widened over time, though the relationship
between newspaper reading and public affairs knowledge was generally positive for all. Education-based knowledge differences
are hardly a new phenomenon. In the United States, for example, variation in policy knowledge across the general population
has been a cause for concern for much of the 20th and 21st centuries (and earlier). Lippmann 1922 bemoans the inability of most ordinary people to sufficiently understand detailed policy discussions, for example, and Hyman and Sheatsley 1947 notes the existence of “chronic know-nothings,” people who cannot be reached by information campaigns and, consequently,
remain chronically uninformed. The notion that people may hold different levels of knowledge as a function of their group
membership also animated scholarly works such as Simmel 1955. What that long line of scholarship suggests about the consequences of such disparities, though, makes the prospect of widening gaps in knowledge quite consequential. For Hyman and Sheatsley 1947, the potential existence of chronic know-nothings and knowledge inequalities raises a serious issue for democracy insofar
as democracy requires an informed citizenry. Moreover, disparity in knowledge is crucial to understanding inequalities in
social control and social power in a variety of forums, such as health and science (e.g., Viswanath, et al. 2006), and not just in the political arena. Priest 1995, for instance, points to the information inequity that citizens in the United States faced in the 1980s and 1990s, given
that most rely on news reports for information about environmental and health risks, though only some have the advanced education
and training necessary to understand risk reports. The extent to which a particular group has knowledge or information likely
also affects the extent to which that group can influence political processes and public policymaking. Thus, scholars have
had ample motivation in the past fifty years to not only identify knowledge gaps but also to understand conditions under which
such gaps might widen, making Tichenor, et al. 1970 a breakthrough of its time.

One of the earliest studies that reported the existence of a knowledge gap. The authors argue that certain segments of the
public are difficult to inform and discuss the psychological causes of the problem.

Lippmann’s book is a classic for political communication scholars, sounding an important alarm about the general lack of necessary
background information to understand key policy debates amongst most of the electorate in the United States.

Priest’s concept of information equity between groups highlights a potential ethical consideration for knowledge gap research.
Moreover, her emphasis on health and science information underscores the importance of not limiting knowledge gap research
to politics and public affairs.

Simmel, Georg. 1955. Conflict and the web of group affiliations. Translated by Kurt H. Wolff and Reinhard Bendix. New York: Free Press.

Explains the Tichenor-Donohue-Olien team’s general research paradigm and how the knowledge gap hypothesis developed. The book
discusses the relationships among social conflict, citizens’ media use, and people’s knowledge, based on data from nineteen
different communities in Minnesota. Chapter 7 directly discusses the knowledge gap hypothesis.

Viswanath and colleagues discuss the consequences of information disparities, noting that such gaps are particularly problematic
with regard to health and science topics for which equal holding of knowledge might help equalize overall well-being.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on
this page. Please subscribe or login.

How to Subscribe

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions and individuals. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here.

Purchase an Ebook Version of This Article

Ebooks of the Oxford Bibliographies Online subject articles are available in North America via a number of retailers including Amazon, vitalsource, and more. Simply search on their sites for Oxford Bibliographies Online Research Guides and your desired subject article.

If you would like to purchase an eBook article and live outside North America please email onlinemarketing@oup.com to express your interest.